free-range politics, organic community

Bernie! Bernie!

Submitted by Wink on Sat, 06/23/2018 - 10:23am

"He’s too old.

Bullshit.

Subjective and lazy.

Then there’s the canard that he’s some sort of traitor, sellout or sheep dog. More bullshit. This particularly specious whine is advanced by the bitter, callow victims of identity politics. He did his best from inside the democrat machine. Had he run as an independent, he would’ve wound up square dancing in the margins with Jill Stein.

Instead, he built the most monolithic and authentically grassroots movement in contemporary political history. If you’re still sniveling about your 28 bucks, grow the fuck up. He was your best shot and he still is. That’s why you ponied up.

What I saw was a party independent, lifelong democratic socialist choose to make an earnest attempt because he felt an obligation to address the insanely imperialist and economically unjust paradigm his country had become about. He saw a vacuum of leadership for genuine progressives, the kindest majority, and he rolled the dice.

I saw a principled man with the gravitas of historic integrity get chewed up and puked out by a shamelessly corrupt party. They saw him as a threat too late. Late enough to slam on the brakes so hard, they showed their ass. I saw a party so sunk in the avaricious ritual of decapitation of their enemies that they didn’t just take his head off….

They guillotined their own queen.

If you’re thinking of all the votes he cast that you vehemently disagree with or all the controversies from his past, don’t bother. I’m well aware. He’s light years ahead of any potential contender by any metric.

It’s cheap to criticize him for not standing up to the cabal that swept the legs out from under him. That cabal has been his office for decades. It’s what he knows. He’s on record opposing almost every evil piece of legislation foisted by it for over thirty years.

He’s still doing it.

Raging polemic coverage of Sanders from both sides tells me one thing. They are still very afraid. That is my point here. Why he is worthy and why he should be taken seriously. He still strikes fear into the hearts of the robber barons. They hate him. They wouldn’t have undermined so goddamn hard to cheat him. They wouldn’t still be tripping over their pudenda so awkwardly to smear him if they weren’t still so desperately sweaty.

Ok, so, like most Berniecrats, I'm more enthused with the "movement" (such as it is) than the man himself, but he Still brings a $h!t Ton more to the table than any Dimocrat you can name, and that's evidenced everywhere he speaks. If Bernie did nothing else in 2016 he got people off their dead asses and out running for Office in 2018. Ten Dimocrats (including a few Berniecrats) running for Congress in two districts near me that otherwise would Not be running. "Why are you running for Office this year?" "Bernie." Point being, love him or hate him, and I know most here aren't fans, Bernie is the one history books will mention as the spark that lit this candle, the old guy that started the "revolution" to end the Beltway bull$h!t, replace Blue Dogs with progressives. How many Berniecrats get themselves elected remains to be seen. We had one here until Dylan Ratigan came out of nowhere to enter the race. I suspect he's "one of them," here to make sure the Berniecrat loses. He's done his job well. And, there's a whole bunch of that from sea to shining sea. But, as the author of that piece notes, "that just shows they're scared $h!tless."
Woke. More people now more woke. We can thank Bernie for that.

Comments

Nearly every time he has had the opportunity to use his platform to push forward his ideals, he has instead taken every opportunity to defend and appease the system.

We cannot look for the system to solve the problems that it depends on to survive.

I personally agree with George Carlin with regards to the futility of voting for him. All it does is make us complicit in the Kidnapping, theft and Death, because becoming "Woke" is not the end goal. We must keep in minde the end goal of what we are aiming for, and it should not include the goal of everybody thinking the exact same way we do. Down that path lies Cultism.

@The Aspie Corner
It should be noted that to run as a Democrat and having access to their database he first had to sign a contract that said if he lost the nomination he must support whomever the winner might be and he did just that.That was in the Donna Brazile book.
I wasn't interested in watching any of the events where he campaigned with/for Hillary but the few clips I did see posted showed a man that hadn't changed a damn thing he supported before losing (being cheated) the nomination, he backtracked on nothing to fit a Hillary a position on anything. It sounded more like an anti-tRump campaign than anything else.
I have my own complaints about Bernie but no one can reasonably dismiss the grassroots fire he lit across the Country.

He should have joined Jill Stein after the DNC's rampant primary fraud. But no. He chose to sheep dog for Billary instead. We can't afford political comfort anymore.

Bernie absolutely let off a lot of steam and energy that had been growing. Every time people start grumbling about things, he's there to let off that pressure, to assure us that we've got somebody fighting for us.

Problem is that they keep turning up the thermostat on the boiler. And then they've been consistently sticking more and more junk in the valve, trying to turn the steam towards putting out the Trump garbage fire...

#2 It should be noted that to run as a Democrat and having access to their database he first had to sign a contract that said if he lost the nomination he must support whomever the winner might be and he did just that.That was in the Donna Brazile book.
I wasn't interested in watching any of the events where he campaigned with/for Hillary but the few clips I did see posted showed a man that hadn't changed a damn thing he supported before losing (being cheated) the nomination, he backtracked on nothing to fit a Hillary a position on anything. It sounded more like an anti-tRump campaign than anything else.
I have my own complaints about Bernie but no one can reasonably dismiss the grassroots fire he lit across the Country.

that one person could do nothing on his own, that the point was about forming a broad-based, democratic, socially responsible movement of the American people;

and that if the American public was ever going to have a government actually of, by and for the people, the people were going to have to run for public office themselves, support and vote for grassroots progressives themselves, form government themselves - save themselves.

There's no point in people blaming Bernie - a decent man in politics, and one unlike any other politician - for not being a magical superman capable of taking down multiple associated groups of obsessively ruthless, psychopathic billionaire/trillionaire super-villains spinning massive webs of stolen power and money and ruining the world since before WW2.

He validated people's belief that democracy and a decent life for all was possible - and managed to get the idea promoted by himself on a corporate media regarding the very notion as absolutely verboten, in order to reach the public limited to this media.

Take the shred of good you have and cherish it, nurture it, act on it - because there's no time left; the remaining pretence of 'democracy' could vanish even faster than it has been; both the economy and ecology are collapsing now and those responsible for this are drastically accelerating the process and pushing for the nuclear obliteration of planetary life, which they apparently believe they personally can survive to live comfortably ever after.

Anyone is free to disagree with the route Bernie's taking, but something constructive has to be achieved now, while anything still remains to be salvaged - how many allies do The People have in government? Not just in the US, in many countries, in great part due to US industrialists. And why toss any of them away in what may be our last chance at survival?

Bernie absolutely let off a lot of steam and energy that had been growing. Every time people start grumbling about things, he's there to let off that pressure, to assure us that we've got somebody fighting for us.

Problem is that they keep turning up the thermostat on the boiler. And then they've been consistently sticking more and more junk in the valve, trying to turn the steam towards putting out the Trump garbage fire...

up

16 users have voted.

—

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

that one person could do nothing on his own, that the point was about forming a broad-based, democratic, socially responsible movement of the American people;

and that if the American public was ever going to have a government actually of, by and for the people, the people were going to have to run for public office themselves, support and vote for grassroots progressives themselves, form government themselves - save themselves.

There's no point in people blaming Bernie - a decent man in politics, and one unlike any other politician - for not being a magical superman capable of taking down multiple associated groups of obsessively ruthless, psychopathic billionaire/trillionaire super-villains spinning massive webs of stolen power and money and ruining the world since before WW2.

He validated people's belief that democracy and a decent life for all was possible - and managed to get the idea promoted by himself on a corporate media regarding the very notion as absolutely verboten, in order to reach the public limited to this media.

Take the shred of good you have and cherish it, nurture it, act on it - because there's no time left; the remaining pretence of 'democracy' could vanish even faster than it has been; both the economy and ecology are collapsing now and those responsible for this are drastically accelerating the process and pushing for the nuclear obliteration of planetary life, which they apparently believe they personally can survive to live comfortably ever after.

Anyone is free to disagree with the route Bernie's taking, but something constructive has to be achieved now, while anything still remains to be salvaged - how many allies do The People have in government? Not just in the US, in many countries, in great part due to US industrialists. And why toss any of them away in what may be our last chance at survival?

up

4 users have voted.

—

"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

back to catch any@aliasalias
of Bernie's stops on Hillary's campaign, post Philly nomination, obviously, they would Not hear Bernie championing Hillary. Bernie simply sounded off with his very own stump speech.
There's a lot not to like about Bernie, but "he campaigned for Hillary!" isn't one of them. Bernie fulfilled his obligation and that's about it.

#2 It should be noted that to run as a Democrat and having access to their database he first had to sign a contract that said if he lost the nomination he must support whomever the winner might be and he did just that.That was in the Donna Brazile book.
I wasn't interested in watching any of the events where he campaigned with/for Hillary but the few clips I did see posted showed a man that hadn't changed a damn thing he supported before losing (being cheated) the nomination, he backtracked on nothing to fit a Hillary a position on anything. It sounded more like an anti-tRump campaign than anything else.
I have my own complaints about Bernie but no one can reasonably dismiss the grassroots fire he lit across the Country.

up

15 users have voted.

—

the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-1.9) All about building progressive media.

Or do we just not vote at all. "Bernie fucked us, so fuck him!"
Fine. Who's your candidate?
Or, does it come down to the same ol', "if we vote for anyone then we're Voting For The System," so fuck that and fuck the system. So we don't vote at all? Which means Four More Years of tRump. Becuz tRump voters are going to vote. For tRump. They won't admit it, but they LOVE this "fuck the illegal immigrants!!" $h!t. LOVE it! "Send 'em back!!" And they LOVE dropping bombs everywhere! "Fuck ALL them AyRabs!!" tRump speaks for them. Loudly. Who we got on our side that speaks for us? Kamala?

up

12 users have voted.

—

the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-1.9) All about building progressive media.

And frankly, so what if it is four more years of Trump? Will anything be different if it becomes "Clinton-in-all-but-name" who directs the legions?

Certainly things will become quieter, because the PTB will no longer have to cover for the fact that they allowed a feces throwing monkey at the helm. But we'll still be in the wars. Even the ones that the new president claims that they have completely ended after a year.

Not one of them is on "Our Side". If by some miracle they decide that the best way to shut the people up is to immediately pass a new new deal to avoid the commies taking over, it will be a damn divine intervention. But TPTB won't do it if they don't have to, and they may think that a President Bernie will keep the people quiet for four more years of looting, while he "Regretfully" proves that once again we must accept what is real and not look for unrealistic and ridiculous goals like a national health service.

I don't have the solution yet, but by accepting that it's a problem means I can work on it, rather than accept a prewrapped solution that does nothing for me.

Or do we just not vote at all. "Bernie fucked us, so fuck him!"
Fine. Who's your candidate?
Or, does it come down to the same ol', "if we vote for anyone then we're Voting For The System," so fuck that and fuck the system. So we don't vote at all? Which means Four More Years of tRump. Becuz tRump voters are going to vote. For tRump. They won't admit it, but they LOVE this "fuck the illegal immigrants!!" $h!t. LOVE it! "Send 'em back!!" And they LOVE dropping bombs everywhere! "Fuck ALL them AyRabs!!" tRump speaks for them. Loudly. Who we got on our side that speaks for us? Kamala?

Not one of them is on "Our Side". If by some miracle they decide that the best way to shut the people up is to immediately pass a new new deal to avoid the commies taking over, it will be a damn divine intervention. But TPTB won't do it if they don't have to, and they may think that a President Bernie will keep the people quiet for four more years of looting, while he "Regretfully" proves that once again we must accept what is real and not look for unrealistic and ridiculous goals like a national health service.

Soviet Russia was the only thing lighting a fire under the western bourgeoisie's asses. With them gone, they know fully well they don't have to do jack shit. Instead, they've taken the Jay Gould approach to the electorate: Divide them up through 'intersectionalism' and white, male, Christian identity bullshit and let the plebs do the rest (People with disabilities and working class issues are deliberately ignored by both groups). Of course, this wouldn't even be going on if said groups actually had any self-awareness.

And frankly, so what if it is four more years of Trump? Will anything be different if it becomes "Clinton-in-all-but-name" who directs the legions?

Certainly things will become quieter, because the PTB will no longer have to cover for the fact that they allowed a feces throwing monkey at the helm. But we'll still be in the wars. Even the ones that the new president claims that they have completely ended after a year.

Not one of them is on "Our Side". If by some miracle they decide that the best way to shut the people up is to immediately pass a new new deal to avoid the commies taking over, it will be a damn divine intervention. But TPTB won't do it if they don't have to, and they may think that a President Bernie will keep the people quiet for four more years of looting, while he "Regretfully" proves that once again we must accept what is real and not look for unrealistic and ridiculous goals like a national health service.

I don't have the solution yet, but by accepting that it's a problem means I can work on it, rather than accept a prewrapped solution that does nothing for me.

up

11 users have voted.

—

Modern education is little more than toeing the line for the capitalist pigs.

Or do we just not vote at all. "Bernie fucked us, so fuck him!"
Fine. Who's your candidate?
Or, does it come down to the same ol', "if we vote for anyone then we're Voting For The System," so fuck that and fuck the system. So we don't vote at all? Which means Four More Years of tRump.

Which guarantees us Four More Years of tRump. And maybe even more, in the incarnation of Pence or Ryan or -- God and Satan alike forbid -- Sessions!

Becuz tRump voters are going to vote. For tRump. They won't admit it, but they LOVE this "fuck the illegal immigrants!!" $h!t. LOVE it! "Send 'em back!!" And they LOVE dropping bombs everywhere! "Fuck ALL them AyRabs!!" tRump speaks for them. Loudly.

You obviously don't live in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

tRump's voters around here proclaim everything you ascribed to them in the above paragraph, and worse!

Who we got on our side that speaks for us? Kamala?

Bernie is probably as close as it gets, at least among those with any chance at all to get elected to anything at all (read: the duopoly). Kamala Harris? ROTFLMAOASTC!

At the point we're in now, I respectfully submit that as a nation we're in a position where we need to elect "Bernies", folks under whose government policies we might have some hope of getting serious peace candidates to run and win.

The poisonous neoconservative mix of interventionistic foreign policy with the Grover Norquist advocated complete neglect of domestic policy is what got us into the scrape we're in today. What Bernie and those like him offer us is the chance to have someone pay some attention to domestic policies for once. That's the only way we're going to get the massively overdue Sherman Antitrust Act prosecutions of our media monopolies, among other things. If we can get a return to smaller business and competition among our news media, we might actually have a Fourth Estate which does its fucking job and covers and reports on all newsworthy political events, not just the ones Big Money want covered (Clinton and tRump).

Then, maybe, we can get genuine, wholehearted peace and leftist candidates into actual power.....

Or do we just not vote at all. "Bernie fucked us, so fuck him!"
Fine. Who's your candidate?
Or, does it come down to the same ol', "if we vote for anyone then we're Voting For The System," so fuck that and fuck the system. So we don't vote at all? Which means Four More Years of tRump. Becuz tRump voters are going to vote. For tRump. They won't admit it, but they LOVE this "fuck the illegal immigrants!!" $h!t. LOVE it! "Send 'em back!!" And they LOVE dropping bombs everywhere! "Fuck ALL them AyRabs!!" tRump speaks for them. Loudly. Who we got on our side that speaks for us? Kamala?

up

12 users have voted.

—

"I say enough! If Israel wants to be the only superpower in the Middle East then they can put their own asses on the line and do it themselves. I want to continue to eat."-- snoopydawg

Or do we just not vote at all. "Bernie fucked us, so fuck him!"
Fine. Who's your candidate?
Or, does it come down to the same ol', "if we vote for anyone then we're Voting For The System," so fuck that and fuck the system. So we don't vote at all? Which means Four More Years of tRump.

Which guarantees us Four More Years of tRump. And maybe even more, in the incarnation of Pence or Ryan or -- God and Satan alike forbid -- Sessions!

Becuz tRump voters are going to vote. For tRump. They won't admit it, but they LOVE this "fuck the illegal immigrants!!" $h!t. LOVE it! "Send 'em back!!" And they LOVE dropping bombs everywhere! "Fuck ALL them AyRabs!!" tRump speaks for them. Loudly.

You obviously don't live in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

tRump's voters around here proclaim everything you ascribed to them in the above paragraph, and worse!

Who we got on our side that speaks for us? Kamala?

Bernie is probably as close as it gets, at least among those with any chance at all to get elected to anything at all (read: the duopoly). Kamala Harris? ROTFLMAOASTC!

At the point we're in now, I respectfully submit that as a nation we're in a position where we need to elect "Bernies", folks under whose government policies we might have some hope of getting serious peace candidates to run and win.

The poisonous neoconservative mix of interventionistic foreign policy with the Grover Norquist advocated complete neglect of domestic policy is what got us into the scrape we're in today. What Bernie and those like him offer us is the chance to have someone pay some attention to domestic policies for once. That's the only way we're going to get the massively overdue Sherman Antitrust Act prosecutions of our media monopolies, among other things. If we can get a return to smaller business and competition among our news media, we might actually have a Fourth Estate which does its fucking job and covers and reports on all newsworthy political events, not just the ones Big Money want covered (Clinton and tRump).

Then, maybe, we can get genuine, wholehearted peace and leftist candidates into actual power.....

up

5 users have voted.

—

the little things you can do are more valuable than the giant things you can't! - @thanatokephaloides. On Twitter @wink1radio. (-1.9) All about building progressive media.

Or do we just not vote at all. "Bernie fucked us, so fuck him!"
Fine. Who's your candidate?
Or, does it come down to the same ol', "if we vote for anyone then we're Voting For The System," so fuck that and fuck the system. So we don't vote at all? Which means Four More Years of tRump.

Which guarantees us Four More Years of tRump. And maybe even more, in the incarnation of Pence or Ryan or -- God and Satan alike forbid -- Sessions!

Becuz tRump voters are going to vote. For tRump. They won't admit it, but they LOVE this "fuck the illegal immigrants!!" $h!t. LOVE it! "Send 'em back!!" And they LOVE dropping bombs everywhere! "Fuck ALL them AyRabs!!" tRump speaks for them. Loudly.

You obviously don't live in Colorado Springs, Colorado.

tRump's voters around here proclaim everything you ascribed to them in the above paragraph, and worse!

Who we got on our side that speaks for us? Kamala?

Bernie is probably as close as it gets, at least among those with any chance at all to get elected to anything at all (read: the duopoly). Kamala Harris? ROTFLMAOASTC!

At the point we're in now, I respectfully submit that as a nation we're in a position where we need to elect "Bernies", folks under whose government policies we might have some hope of getting serious peace candidates to run and win.

The poisonous neoconservative mix of interventionistic foreign policy with the Grover Norquist advocated complete neglect of domestic policy is what got us into the scrape we're in today. What Bernie and those like him offer us is the chance to have someone pay some attention to domestic policies for once. That's the only way we're going to get the massively overdue Sherman Antitrust Act prosecutions of our media monopolies, among other things. If we can get a return to smaller business and competition among our news media, we might actually have a Fourth Estate which does its fucking job and covers and reports on all newsworthy political events, not just the ones Big Money want covered (Clinton and tRump).

Then, maybe, we can get genuine, wholehearted peace and leftist candidates into actual power.....

up

6 users have voted.

—

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.

(You're gonna catch hell for this from the, "He's not perfect, so I'm not voting" crowd, and of course the rainbows and unicorn crowd of "He could build a third party," [meaning; and then after 50 or 100 years he might get elected ...] Ignore them all if those are their best ideas, if they offer any ideas at all give 'em a stamp and tell them to write a letter to whoever may care.)

"Had he run as an independent, he would’ve wound up square dancing in the margins with Jill Stein.

Instead, he built the most monolithic and authentically grassroots movement in contemporary political history. If you’re still sniveling about your 28 bucks, grow the fuck up. He was your best shot and he still is.

What I saw was a party independent, lifelong democratic socialist choose to make an earnest attempt because he felt an obligation to address the insanely imperialist and economically unjust paradigm his country had become about. He saw a vacuum of leadership ... and he rolled the dice.

I saw a principled man with the gravitas of historic integrity get chewed up and puked out by a shamelessly corrupt party. ...

If you’re thinking of all the votes he cast that you vehemently disagree with or all the controversies from his past, don’t bother. I’m well aware. He’s light years ahead of any potential contender by any metric."

@GreyWolf
is possibly the worst reaction possible to disagreement on this issue. It is exactly that attitude that got us how we are now in online conversation. Team divisions and demanding loyalty to personalities rather than discussing the issue.

I cannot stress enough how important it is that we have rational arguments about this.

If you feel that the third party and not voting solutions are not correct, I suggest that you defend that position instead of merely dismissing them without thought. Let's not go over lists of successes and other dubious achievements when the reality is that people are broke, hungry and angry. How is voting for Bernie going to fix that? Last time it got us a platform that nobody bothered to fight for and an even more entrenched political elite.

(You're gonna catch hell for this from the, "He's not perfect, so I'm not voting" crowd, and of course the rainbows and unicorn crowd of "He could build a third party," [meaning; and then after 50 or 100 years he might get elected ...] Ignore them all if those are their best ideas, if they offer any ideas at all give 'em a stamp and tell them to write a letter to whoever may care.)

"Had he run as an independent, he would’ve wound up square dancing in the margins with Jill Stein.

Instead, he built the most monolithic and authentically grassroots movement in contemporary political history. If you’re still sniveling about your 28 bucks, grow the fuck up. He was your best shot and he still is.

What I saw was a party independent, lifelong democratic socialist choose to make an earnest attempt because he felt an obligation to address the insanely imperialist and economically unjust paradigm his country had become about. He saw a vacuum of leadership ... and he rolled the dice.

I saw a principled man with the gravitas of historic integrity get chewed up and puked out by a shamelessly corrupt party. ...

If you’re thinking of all the votes he cast that you vehemently disagree with or all the controversies from his past, don’t bother. I’m well aware. He’s light years ahead of any potential contender by any metric."

"I strongly suggest that "Ignore them" is possibly the worst reaction possible to disagreement on this issue."

That may be true, but I believe that the worst reaction Wink could have is to get depressed and give up.

"It is exactly that attitude that got us how we are now in online conversation."

To ignore insults is the "attitude that got us how we are now in online conversation"?

"Team divisions and demanding loyalty to personalities rather than discussing the issue."

We are in a winner-take-all electoral system. For thousands of years that has always resulted in a two-party system. Time is short. I've lived in recent years in Massachusetts and South Carolina. MA always goes blue and SC always goes red, why should I ever vote. I voted for the first and only time in my five decades on this earth for Bernie in a primary in SC. If you have better ideas I'd love to hear them.

"I cannot stress enough how important it is that we have rational arguments about this."

Still listening. (I missed what you edited out from before JtC posted and users to be civil ... was that what was important for Wink to listen to? Or was that specifically the type of content I would advise Wink to ignore?)

"If you feel that the third party and not voting solutions are not correct, I suggest that you defend that position instead of merely dismissing them without thought."

I've already briefly discussed this, if you are still unclear I will elaborate.

"Let's not go over lists of successes and other dubious achievements when the reality is that people are broke, hungry and angry. How is voting for Bernie going to fix that? Last time it got us a platform that nobody bothered to fight for and an even more entrenched political elite."

"... lists of successes and other dubious achievements ..." Fine, you dislike Bernie is what I'm understanding. The voters from his state seem to like him. I have only had one chance in my life to vote for Bernie, and I took it. I would do it again if again given the opportunity. You are implicitly advising me that I made a mistake and I should have voted for a Clinton. Sorry, I chose not to.

#5 is possibly the worst reaction possible to disagreement on this issue. It is exactly that attitude that got us how we are now in online conversation. Team divisions and demanding loyalty to personalities rather than discussing the issue.

I cannot stress enough how important it is that we have rational arguments about this.

If you feel that the third party and not voting solutions are not correct, I suggest that you defend that position instead of merely dismissing them without thought. Let's not go over lists of successes and other dubious achievements when the reality is that people are broke, hungry and angry. How is voting for Bernie going to fix that? Last time it got us a platform that nobody bothered to fight for and an even more entrenched political elite.

@GreyWolf
First of all, the question of whether or not someone is disheartened by being opposed is immaterial. If people's positions cannot handle a friendly debate, there's no way they'll survive a challenge when the DNC applies their full power to quash "the movement".

Opposition is not an insult.

If it's been around for thousands of years, I seriously doubt that one vote in one election will make a difference. And my better ideas are all over the place. Haven't had the decades that the political parties have had to fully collate them, but I'm working on it.

I simply stated "Good Luck with That" and dismissed with The Carlin Clip. I meant it in a condescending and dismissive way, and was called out for it by JTC. I accepted the Shido, and revised my post to a clear and respectful statement of position.

Finally as to your last points, you are assuming motive on my point which I have not exhibited. I am in no way saying that your vote is incorrect for you or that you have made a mistake. I am saying that the long term effect of it made it pointless and a redirection of your political energy into a form that will not bring about lasting change.

"I strongly suggest that "Ignore them" is possibly the worst reaction possible to disagreement on this issue."

That may be true, but I believe that the worst reaction Wink could have is to get depressed and give up.

"It is exactly that attitude that got us how we are now in online conversation."

To ignore insults is the "attitude that got us how we are now in online conversation"?

"Team divisions and demanding loyalty to personalities rather than discussing the issue."

We are in a winner-take-all electoral system. For thousands of years that has always resulted in a two-party system. Time is short. I've lived in recent years in Massachusetts and South Carolina. MA always goes blue and SC always goes red, why should I ever vote. I voted for the first and only time in my five decades on this earth for Bernie in a primary in SC. If you have better ideas I'd love to hear them.

"I cannot stress enough how important it is that we have rational arguments about this."

Still listening. (I missed what you edited out from before JtC posted and users to be civil ... was that what was important for Wink to listen to? Or was that specifically the type of content I would advise Wink to ignore?)

"If you feel that the third party and not voting solutions are not correct, I suggest that you defend that position instead of merely dismissing them without thought."

I've already briefly discussed this, if you are still unclear I will elaborate.

"Let's not go over lists of successes and other dubious achievements when the reality is that people are broke, hungry and angry. How is voting for Bernie going to fix that? Last time it got us a platform that nobody bothered to fight for and an even more entrenched political elite."

"... lists of successes and other dubious achievements ..." Fine, you dislike Bernie is what I'm understanding. The voters from his state seem to like him. I have only had one chance in my life to vote for Bernie, and I took it. I would do it again if again given the opportunity. You are implicitly advising me that I made a mistake and I should have voted for a Clinton. Sorry, I chose not to.

the reality is that people are broke, hungry and angry. How is voting for Bernie going to fix that?

My answer to your question: If we can get Bernie, or someone like him, actually elected, we'll get someone in power who rejects the Grover Norquist view of domestic policy (i.e., ignore it in hopes it will go away). Any serious attention to domestic policy would be better than the complete lack of such attention has been since the end of the Reagan Administration. With a domestic policy oriented person in the Oval Office, we could get the altogether necessary Sherman Act breakup of the media monopolies, which would restore a situation whereunder real peace and green candidates can get elected into power.

Last time it got us a platform that nobody bothered to fight for and an even more entrenched political elite.

"Last time it got us" Perpetual Goldwater Girl Hillary Clinton for our opposition to tRump. As I predicted well back in 2015, if Clinton was the Dems' candidate, tRump would be President; and that's just what happened!

#5 is possibly the worst reaction possible to disagreement on this issue. It is exactly that attitude that got us how we are now in online conversation. Team divisions and demanding loyalty to personalities rather than discussing the issue.

I cannot stress enough how important it is that we have rational arguments about this.

If you feel that the third party and not voting solutions are not correct, I suggest that you defend that position instead of merely dismissing them without thought. Let's not go over lists of successes and other dubious achievements when the reality is that people are broke, hungry and angry. How is voting for Bernie going to fix that? Last time it got us a platform that nobody bothered to fight for and an even more entrenched political elite.

up

9 users have voted.

—

"I say enough! If Israel wants to be the only superpower in the Middle East then they can put their own asses on the line and do it themselves. I want to continue to eat."-- snoopydawg

I know I have said this before several times, but I wasn't disappointed because I never expected him to be Jesus yet he was a pretty excellent John the Baptist (sorry for the religious reference - John the Baptist was the "voice crying out in the wilderness, 'make way for the coming salvation'" whatever that may be - paraphrased).

There is no one I see who even comes close to his record, and his still coming actions, bills, speeches, etc. He is the energizer bunny.

It is my intention to vote for the light where ever I see it. I might even vote for a republican for TX state legislature who promises to properly fund public schools and take care of senior citizens. And he is a farmer.

I will not vote for any outright corporate democrats. Luckily, there are plenty good folks running for office in Texas this year. I don't know that I am 100% with any of them, but enough to vote for them. I received an email about a month ago from the Greens saying they won't be on the ballot in Texas this year. Here, in 2018, there are those who will earn my vote and very possibly win. I will campaign for them in my own way.

As far as 2020? My intuition, based on climate related science (and economic) facts, is that there will be a(n) event(s) and the game will change.

Also, democrats are fucking themselves by cheating progressives. IMO that will evolve into a new animal as well.

Running as an independent, on his own, no party backing him except one of his own construction, and with several handicaps of his own making (like ducking out and then back in), he still cornered nearly 20% of the popular vote in 1992.

Sooner or later somebody's going to beat that record - and maybe take all the marbles. Both the Established Parties are tottering, and it's an open question which one will fall first.

Running as an independent, on his own, no party backing him except one of his own construction, and with several handicaps of his own making (like ducking out and then back in), he still cornered nearly 20% of the popular vote in 1992.

Sooner or later somebody's going to beat that record - and maybe take all the marbles. Both the Established Parties are tottering, and it's an open question which one will fall first.

Be ready when the opportunity arrives.

up

6 users have voted.

—

"The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?" ~Orwell, "1984"

as many others have pointed out he won more votes in the primary than Her did, but because she had already bought them a year before she declared they were able to override the will of the voters.

I'm sure that if he does run again that people will vote for him. I'm seeing people on other websites saying that they will. But until the DNC agrees to run a clean campaign I just don't see anyone but their corporate wh*re winning.

And I'm waiting for him to denounce Russia Gate. He of all people have to know that Hillary lost because she was a horrible candidate. Biden has admitted that. Actually I think he did so during the election.

up

8 users have voted.

—

Disclaimer: No Russian, living or dead, had anything to do with the posting of this proudly home-grown comment

An undeniable landslide and an immediate and permanent refusal to accept suspicious results.

If the public doesn't raise an immediate en masse pacific stink, they've got away with it again, as they have for freaking ever. The American public cares about democracy; The Psychopaths That Be detest it and have been getting away with murder for long that they believe it's their right to be 'above the law'. But the country is formed of the people who inhabit it, not those relative few who lie, buy, cheat and steal their way into government intended to serve the public interest but warped into acting against it instead.

We, the people of the world, are the power we've been waiting for, and if we don't act to save ourselves, no-one else can.

But the current international situation is such that there would be a great deal of support for the American people pacifically repudiating their pre-selected rogue government; it's well-known that American elections are a very unfunny joke and that those cheated in are fascists set on global domination - and that something has to be done.

... “The Human Rights Council is a poor defender of human rights. Worse than that, it has become an exercise in shameless hypocrisy,” Pompeo said, blasting the council for passing more resolutions against Israel than against the rest of the world combined. ...

... Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu thanked the US for the “courageous decision” to leave the body, which he called a “biased, hostile, anti-Israel organization that has betrayed its mission of protecting human rights.”

“The US decision to leave this prejudiced body is an unequivocal statement that enough is enough,” Netanyahu said. “Israel welcomes the American announcement.” ...

...On Monday, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein criticized Washington over the “unconscionable” policy of separating children of immigrants who cross the border illegally and holding them in detention centers.

“I call on the United States to immediately end the practice of forcible separation of these children,” al-Hussein said.

While the timing of the US exit from the UN body coincides with this criticism, Washington’s objections to the Human Rights Council over the years have mostly been in regard to Israel. Ambassador Haley has accused the council of a “relentless, pathological campaign” against Israel, and said the US would leave unless the body gets rid of its “chronic anti-Israel bias.”

Shortly after its establishment in 2006, the council voted to make a review of alleged human rights abuses by Israel a permanent feature of every session, known as Agenda Item 7. Likewise, the body’s special rapporteur on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the only expert whose mandate is not time-limited.

The George W. Bush administration boycotted the council at its inception, but the Obama administration decided to “re-engage” with the body in 2009. Even so, in 2011 Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accused the council of “structural bias” against Israel. ...

...Leaving the council is unlikely any immediate practical implications for US diplomacy, aside from allowing the UN body to continue condemnations of Israel without much in the way of opposition. Last month, when the council voted to investigate the killing of over 100 Palestinians in protests along the Israel-Gaza border and accused Israel of excessive force, only the US and Australia voted against.

China has published a report listing the woes of American democracy, including human rights, interventions and discrimination, in response to a scathing paper published by the US State Department.

The "Human Rights Record of the United States in 2017" report, released by the Information Office of China's State Council on Tuesday, is a response to the US State Department's Country Reports on Human Rights Practices. The US review, issued on April 20, labeled the governments of China, Russia, Iran and North Korea as "morally reprehensible" and "forces of instability" that "violate human rights of those within their borders on a daily basis."

Now China is pointing to America's own poor human rights record, both at home and abroad. ...

...The report, which draws on official US data, open sources and the US media, accused the US of "serious infringement of citizens' civilian rights," "systematic racial discrimination,""widening rich-poor divide," as well as "continued violations of human rights in other countries" and "severe flaws" in its democracy.

The last point refers to Syria, where the US-led bombing campaign has inflicted "a large number of civilian casualties," it states, citing reports that "at least 12 schools, 15 mosques, 15 bridges," a refugee camp and other civilian infrastructure were shelled by the allies.

The report highlighted a growing disparity between the rich and the poor in the US, where over 40 million are living in poverty, and the issue of racial discrimination that plagues the country's law enforcement and courts.

Citing the US Sentencing Commission, Beijing pointed out that black male offenders should expect 19.1 percent longer sentences than "similarly situated" white Americans. The report also drew attention to the surging gun violence that US authorities have failed to tackle.

Criticizing the direction in which America is heading with the wealthiest minority grabbing all the power, the report argued that the once exemplary American democracy is "drowning in money."

"U.S. money politics keeps fermenting, and the rich guide the direction of politics. The weak face increasingly harsh restrictions on voting, and scandals involving politicians are frequent," it says. ...

as many others have pointed out he won more votes in the primary than Her did, but because she had already bought them a year before she declared they were able to override the will of the voters.

I'm sure that if he does run again that people will vote for him. I'm seeing people on other websites saying that they will. But until the DNC agrees to run a clean campaign I just don't see anyone but their corporate wh*re winning.

And I'm waiting for him to denounce Russia Gate. He of all people have to know that Hillary lost because she was a horrible candidate. Biden has admitted that. Actually I think he did so during the election.

up

4 users have voted.

—

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.